Like Street Photography? Forget Quebec

When you photograph a stranger in the street, do you think about the possible legal ramifications of publishing the shot? Hopefully you do to some extent – if you plan on licensing the image for commercial uses, you will likely need a model release.

But for plenty of uses, consent isn’t required. Let’s say that photo was destined to be in the pages of a newspaper, or that you might want to put it up on your website, or that you just wanted to email it to a friend. No problem, right? Not if you live in Quebec. Each of these uses may be subject to little-known laws that may land you and your photograph in legal trouble.

This article from the Montreal Mirror is from a couple of years ago, but it highlights a strange law that forbids photographers in Quebec from publishing photos of people without their consent, no matter what the use. The article details the origin of this law:

It was [photographer Gilbert Duclos’] 1988 photo of Pascale-Claude Aubry, then 17, wearing a black sweater and sporting cropped bleached hair sitting at the entrance of a downtown Scotiabank that led to the law. Duclos donated the photo to a small, now-defunct literary magazine Vice-Versa, which used the image on its cover.

Aubry – who hadn’t given permission for the shot – claimed that the photo led people to “laugh” at her. She demanded $10,000 in compensation. Duclos offered an amount of “what I would have paid a model.” She refused and sued, with the case going all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Essentially, the strange law boils down to a right of privacy (even though they may be in a public place). Before engaging in any street photography in Quebec, it might suit you to look into the legalities of what you might shoot. If you’re a brave navigator of legal documents, you can have a look through the Supreme Court’s decision which includes the following:

The right to one’s image is an element of the right to privacy under s. 5 of the Quebec Charter. If the purpose of the right to privacy is to protect a sphere of individual autonomy, it must include the ability to control the use made of one’s image. There is an infringement of a person’s right to his or her image and, therefore, fault as soon as the image is published without consent and enables the person to be identified.

As a photographer, I can only say that it’s sad that anyone attempting to document daily life in Quebec through photography may have to worry about whether or not he/she will be sued for doing so. The spread of similar laws over the world would turn street photography into a dying art.

I was interested to read your entry (a friend sent me the link) – Gilbert Duclos is my uncle.

I clearly remember when he was fighting this in the Supreme Court – most Quebec newspapers were behind him, since they feared the outcome of the trial – justifiably so, it turned out.

Gilbert was so shocked by the decision that he ended up making a documentary about it: “La rue – Zone interdite”. It explores the art of street photography, and the effect that such a law would have on it. Here’s a review, if you’re interested:

About Darby Sawchuk

Darby Sawchuk is a Canadian-born photographer who currently resides in Manchester, England. He has travelled to over 40 countries and is always adding more to the list. He creates stock for multiple agencies and is available for assignments.

His work has appeared in such publications as: Men's Journal, New York Magazine, Globetrotters Guides, Footprint Guides, Western Living Magazine, The Telegraph, Forbes Traveler, Country Explorers and more. Read more.